Opinion

Mendez

Court
District Court, M.D. Florida
Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 41.3%

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

CESAR DRAGO MENDEZ,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 3:26-cv-336-MMH-SJH

WARDEN, BAKER COUNTY DETENTION

CENTER, and U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondents.

___________________________________

ORDER

Petitioner Cesar Drago Mendez initiated this action by filing a pro se

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1;

Petition). Mendez alleges that the immigration court ordered him removed on

October 5, 2023, and he did not file an appeal to the Board of Immigration

Appeals. Id. at 5. According to Mendez, since January 8, 2026, United States

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has detained him pending

removal. Id. Mendez contends that his continued detention is unlawful and

requests the Court order his immediate release. Id. at 6–8.

In Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 690 (2001), the Supreme Court held

that indefinite detention of aliens raises serious constitutional concerns. Once

an order of removal is final, ICE should make every effort to remove the alien

within a reasonable time. Id. at 701. Further, the Court concluded that six

months is a presumptively reasonable period to detain a removable alien

awaiting deportation. Id. “Although not expressly stated, the Supreme Court

appears to view the six-month period to include the 90-day removal period plus

90 days thereafter.” Akinwale v. Ashcroft, 287 F.3d 1050, 1052 (11th Cir. 2002).

After that six-month period has passed and the alien “provides good

reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the

reasonably foreseeable future,” the burden then shifts to the Government to

provide evidence sufficient to rebut that showing. Id. (citing Zadvydas, 533

U.S. at 701). Thus, “in order to state a claim under Zadvydas the alien not only

must show post-removal order detention in excess of six months but also must

provide evidence of a good reason to believe that there is no significant

likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.” Akinwale, 287 F.3d

at 1052.

Because ICE took Mendez into custody on January 8, 2026, any claim

seeking release under Zadvydas is not yet ripe, and is thus premature. When

Mendez’s Zadvydas claim becomes ripe, he may file a new petition to seek

discharge from custody while he awaits removal. Should he wish to file a new

petition, Mendez must pay a filing fee of $5.00 or file a complete motion to

proceed in forma pauperis. Additionally, Mendez must use the form approved

2

for use in the Middle District of Florida. See Local Rule 6.04(a) (“A pro se

person in custody must use the standard form[.]”).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The Petition (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.

2. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing this case without

prejudice, terminate any pending motions, and close the file.

3. The Clerk shall send Mendez a habeas corpus petition under 28

U.S.C. § 2241 and an application to proceed in forma pauperis (prisoner

filings).

DONE AND ORDERED at Jacksonville, Florida, this 19th day of

March, 2026.

United States District Judge

Jax-9 3/19

C: Cesar Drago Mendez

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.